Your Other Camera

Hmmm, okay Travis, let's figure out timing.

How about never. Is never good for you?

 

Wait a minute, how much could I charge for such lessons?

 

If I could charge a boatload of money, this might work.

 

If not, well, I've got all the free work I can handle.

 

Just pulling your leg Travis. I'd do it, but it would be a very difficult

task over the web. It's all so personal and fluid. There are some

pretty good video tapes and a million books if I recall.

 

The question is whether you can draw. Drawing is the basis of

all painting, no matter how abstract it becomes later. Picasso

could draw like an old master...not that you could tell from his

more famous work later. But he had the basics down pat.

 

So that is where to start...with drawing. No brainer gear: Pack of

pencils and some paper. Nothing in Titanium. Just retro carbon

pencils and a nice paper with some tooth to it. It's a slow

process, not for the impatient person.

get some bob ross tapes. remember <a href=http://www.bobross.com/home.htm">"thisguy"</a> ? happy trees and quiet rivers.

<a href=http://www.bobross.com/home.htm>"thisguy"</a>

hmmmmmmmmmmm Marc................is that anything like............The question is whether you can "see". "Seeing" is the basis of all photography.............So that is where to start...with "seeing". No brainer gear: rolls of film and some camera. Nothing in Titanium. Just a camera and a nice film with some tooth to it. It's a slow process, not for the impatient person.

 

and btw...i never said gear was unimportant...........i simply asked why there couldn't be at least an even distribution of discussions on gear and aesthetics.............although, according to your scenario of how to draw..............i should ask that aesthetics be discussed more that 50%.........after all its not the gear/pencils/camera that matter, it's what you can do with them that does.

<center>

<b>

:)

</b>

</center>

To echo what Preston said, this is a gear forum, so what's the problem? This list is not the be-all end-all for me when it comes to discourse on photography as art, or as philosophy, nor should it have to be for anyone else. Try a multimodal approach, do some digging around. Again, what's the problem?

<I>this is a gear forum, so what's the problem?</I><P>

IIRC, Tony's initial idea behind this forum was to get away from all the hardware talk and to put more emphasis on photography, i.e., <I>using</I> cameras, specifically Leicas.

Doug, yea, but why this thread? I just saw a Leica CM thread being discussed. Did you see it? And the 1000s in the archives?

Travis, this book, "Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain" by Betty Edwards might help you. A lot of people are "untrained" in the art of vision while in junior school, and Ms. Edward's brain research and techniques help to get that skill back into your life:

 

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0874774241/qid=1065028866/sr=12-1/102-1460939-3312968?v=glance&s=books

Thx Vic.

I deeply respect the work and the personalities of those who tend to harp the importance of the photograph (the product) and the photographer (the vision) over the equipment (only the tool), but let's face it: We're an on-line bulletin board with discussions that are loosly centered around the use of Leica equipment to pursue our art and craft. I have always harped that we are more than just an "equipment" board, but, none of us are taking pictures right now, we're sitting at computer screens. It's not always easy to discuss vision at a computer screen -- you have to feel it and see it and hopefully capture something that resembles it. But talk about it? On line? The question pertained to your alternate equipment choices. It's no different than picking natural bristles over synthetic ones, or discussing Goodyears v. Firestones when you're at Costco eating pizza.

<p>

I like my Bessa-L and 25/4. Cool little camera.

Betty Edward's book, mentioned above, is wonderful. You don't even need to have a desire to learn how to draw to get something from it. Highly recommended for anyone.

Thanks Tony, makes sense to me.

Travis, this might have started the ball game.

 

I believe most of us shoot with Leicas. Ok maybe Grant is out.

 

So, Grant responded in his usual rather blunt style( rightly or wrongly...does it matter). So the game started. Some threads take on a life of their own, as in this thread. However, i thought it was quite thought provoking, and interesting. No need for folk to fall out! So lets all kiss and makeup...at least until the next heated discussion.

I'm still wondering why Kevin M constantly feels compelled to hurl insults. And then complain about what other people do to the discussion. All I did was ask a question, and Kevin goes berserk.

Thomas, your obtuse logic escapes me...Travis asked where to

start. He is obviously a beginner. How many here are

beginners? Some maybe, but certainly not a majority. Once the

basics are mastered in art, then things get more complex in

terms of innovative technique, execution AND materials.

 

While a box of crayons and cheap paper can end up a

masterpiece in the hands of a master, not many masters (if any)

choose those media to create their masterpieces.

 

Lofty theory is one thing, reality another.

You seem rather selective about what you call an insult, Jeff. I see it as just responding to an endless string of taunts and condescending, adolescent comments, which I find insulting. You and Grant weigh in on nearly every thread that's gear-oriented and make some put down, yet won't offer any <i>positive</i> input when asked to do so. You repeat ad-nauseum, that it's the eye, the vision, the artist, etc., and that the camera doesn't matter. Which is fine as far as it goes, but how about starting a thread with that as a theme rather than making fun of the contributions of other forum members with no-caps, three-word, cryptic jibes.

 

I'll lay off if you will; I swear.

a) Nikon FE2, AIS lenses.

 

b) There is no connection whatsoever between the extent to which people obsess on (or foreswear) gear and the quality of their art. I personally know some great (and hugely successful) artists who are major gear-queers. And you know, vice-versa regarding the righteous types...

 

c) sweet paintings, guys!

<p>

Travis, this book: <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0395530075/qid=1065049624/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/102-5862351-6269723?v=glance&s=books&n=507846">

The Natural Way to Draw</a>, by Kimon Nicolaides, is one of the best books on drawing. It's also a delightful book to read, even if you never learn to draw. It will help you see.

</p>

<p>

Oh, I don't have a Leica. But if I did, and I stopped using it, I'd use my Nikon Fm2n / 50mm 1.8. It's a good set up (for me).

</p>

I like many of the images posted here. Sometimes they can even

inspire. I personally don't evaluate an individuals work by their

words, but instead by their works.

 

So, copping an attitude has little effect. In fact, it's the oldest

horseshit game in the art world. Just a thinly veiled "I'm better

than you" or "I'm more serious than you" mind screw. Keep in

mind it's not the content that people object to, which may be

worth considering, it's the "holier than thou" delivery.

 

Which here on this little forum is absolutely hilarious.

 

A few goldfish in a little bowl full of guppies...meanwhile there is

the ocean where the entire bowl rates as Plakton on the artistic

food chain.

 

Being plankton is okay, unless you fancy yourself as being a

shark. Then it becomes delusional.<div></div>

If you want to discuss "it's the photographer, not the camera" please go to:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0067vA (BTW, it

won't be archived)

 

It seems like many of you are dying to talk about this, and I started a perfectly

good thread to do it in. I don't think any of this has to do with Travis' post, for

god's sake, he was just curious what others use besides Leica!

 

Oh- and this IS the Leica forum, if we thought there was something better in

our price range, we would have gotten it. So yeah, for my purposes and

budget, I think Contax is the superior camera! It would be absurd to assume I

think otherwise... why would I get gear which is not apropriate or I didn't like?

marc is makin me hungry with all this food talk...

think im gonna go catch a lobster...

<i>no-caps, three-word, cryptic jibes</i><p>

 

I've never posted with no caps, and I don't remember anything with three words, and my comments are hardly cryptic. I really have to wonder what you are talking about.<p>

 

And if you want to see my contributions, <a href="http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member-all?proc_name=bboard&user_id=19592">click here.</a> You'll find that I contribute quite a bit on the subjects I know about, such as using a camera to take photographs, getting a show, printing, using Photoshop, etc etc etc.

If it still make any sense now, Im have only been using 2 cameras and 2 lenses for the last year or so. M4P 35/2 and Fx3 24 sigma. I was trying out Todd's summaron and has been sticking to it for weeks on my Bessar R.

 

I have quite a few lenses and bodies, yes. Doesn't anyone?

 

Am I asking this question in this thread because Im a gear-geek? No. I have been asking dumb questions all along, so why pick this one? Or why not, you'd ask. ;)

 

Of course, before I shoot a scene, I have to SEE first with my eyes. The camera/lenses is just the tools I need to make that scene appear on film and then print. What is wrong with that? WHy can't anyone talk about the tools they'd use?

 

Just check this forum down the list, how many of them are about gears? Are you gonna go to everyone of them and tell them TO SEE! instead?

 

 

Im was like asking a bunch of friends , "hey, do you think Mac is good or a PC?". SO Im a computer freak?

 

Grant, look at the people around you here. I can tell you now (if noone wants to) that there are MANY forumers here taking pictures better than you, IMO. Many can SEE better than you. I don't include myself and I like your work. I don't see THESE people busting people all the time. Why? Because they let their pictures speak for themselves. THESE people also talk about gears and film and pictures.

 

I can just name you one such person (there are many). Marc Williams.

 

 

So, get real.

Competitive comparisons are also subjective horseshit on this

forum (sorry Travis). None of us here appeared in this months

Aperture or any other decent venue. I don't know about others

here, but I haven't had a call from the photographic curator of

MOMA, and am pretty damned sure I never will.

 

This is just a bunch folks trying to express themselves as best

they can. It's all very personal. So is what they use to express

themselves.

 

I do however believe there needs to be a balance. A reminder

that vision isn't the function of gear is worthwhile. What does that

best for me is seeing the persons vision, not hearing about it.

The recent thread about NYC featured over a hundred images.

A few of them reminded me to trust my heart and allow myself to

get into the "creative zone". Grant's words mean little to me. His

photographs mean a lot...to the point that I've asked to aquire

one.